13

The Aging, Transformative Self

Growth Is Not Just for the Young

The transformative self is a self that places value on the idea of eudaimonic
growth. But there is another kind of self that focuses on growth: The aging self.
If you are an optimist about getting old, you might agree. If you are an
age pessimist, you might disagree, thinking that growth is for the young.
The pessimists’ view is common in both popular culture and academic psy-
chology, despite the data.

Debunking the Idea That Growth Is Just for the Young

Here is what we find from the bulk of research: Older adults value the idea of
eudaimonic growth at least as much as younger adults do. Older adults are
more likely to define their lives in terms of eudaimonic growth. When older
adults look to the past, they are more likely to see eudaimonic growth. When
they look to the future, they continue to plan for eudaimonic growth. Well, of
course, not all older adults do. But neither do all youth. In fact, a smaller pro-
portion of youth do. Older adults on average are at least as likely as younger
adults to interpret the past and plan the future with eudaimonic growth in
mind, and older adults are at least as likely to interpret and plan their lives
in terms of eudaimonic growth rather than in terms of prevention, mainte-
nance, and loss. In other words, older adults are at least as likely as younger
adults to have a transformative self.1
This idea runs contrary to the common view that “growth is for the young,
and decline is for the old.” I do not wish to argue that the common view is
flat-​out wrong. It is only partially wrong. We have good reason and empirical
evidence to hold the common view. But we also have good reason and empir-
ical evidence to hold the view of this chapter—​that the aging self is especially
identified with the idea of growth. The common view of aging and growth
seems to be grounded in common sense: Looking at development throughout

The Transformative Self. Jack J. Bauer, Oxford University Press. © Oxford University Press 2021.
DOI: 10.1093/​oso/​9780199970742.003.0013
382  The Development of the Transformative Self

the life course, a progressive acquisition of readily observable abilities is the

hallmark of youth, whereas personal losses naturally accumulate, at an ac-
celerated pace, with age.2 Physical abilities, friends and family, peak income,
several psychological abilities relating to attention and memory, and other
goods tend to fade away in one way or another in older adulthood.
However, not all abilities decline with age, even with regard to
memory: Older adults show improvements in the processing of emotion-​
laden and meaning-​laden information.3 Older adults show even more pro-
pensity toward growth when it comes to growth concerns—​that is, thinking
about their lives in humanistic ways that foster growth, such as the use of
growth themes in their life stories.4 In addition, we see the progressive de-
velopment of numerous characteristics of a good life from young adulthood
(e.g., mid-​20s) through midlife, such as emotional stability and well-​being,
open-​mindedness, conscientiousness, and value perspectivity.5
Still, people generally think that growth is for the young, not the old. Adults
of all ages have been taught to believe that the aging process is one of decline
rather than growth.6 The thinking goes: Older adults shift their priorities to
deal with all the loss going on around them.7 This shift in priorities amounts
to an increasing number of goals oriented toward maintenance and preven-
tion with age as well as a decreasing number of gain-​oriented goals. These
processes are at the root of the Selection–​Optimization–​Compensation
(SOC) model of life span development by Paul Baltes and his many colleagues
throughout the years at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development
in Berlin.8 Findings in support of SOC have been replicated with different
methods, and I add that this research represents a well-​organized body of
findings that emerges from meticulous methods.
The problem with this research lies not in the methods or findings but
rather in a particular interpretation of those findings that sometimes
surfaces in discussion sections of journal articles—​an interpretation that
squares so readily with common intuitions that it largely goes unques-
tioned. The misinterpretation is to think that older adults focus primarily on
loss, maintenance, and prevention rather than growth—​when in fact they
do not. The correct interpretation of the data is that older adults focus at
least as much on growth as on prevention and loss. And these data apply to
people’s goals and plans for the future, which is relatively shorter for older
adults. Then, calling to mind the distinction between growth and gain
(see Chapters 5 and 6), older adults focus at least as much on mere gain—​
let alone eudaimonic growth—​when planning for the future. Older adults’
 The Aging, Transformative Self  383

focus on growth is even more pronounced when they think about their per-
sonal past, as we will see.
At this point, I note that, as throughout this book, the self refers specifi-
cally to the person’s subjective construals of themself as a person. The aging
self is not equivalent to the aging person. The aging person has an aging self,
which is to say, an understanding of one’s own person that is older rather than
younger. But age is a matter of chronological time. What matters for self-​
identity and a good life has more to do with personal time (see Chapter 4)—​
that is, time as interpreted in terms of personal value and meaning. The topic
here is whether the adult person’s developing self-​identity is a story of decline
or growth—​or both.

Growth Goals and the Aging Self

Let’s look first at goals and then at memories. Between the two, it is even
less intuitive that older adults would focus on gain when looking to the fu-
ture in their personal goals. It seems more rational to focus on maintenance
and prevention later in life than earlier. But what the data show is this: Yes,
younger adults are more likely than older adults to focus on gain in their
goals. And yes, older adults are more likely than younger adults to focus on
loss (whether as prevention of loss or escape from loss). However: No, older
adults are not more likely to focus on losses than on gains in their goals. At
no point in the life course are adults on average likely to focus their goals on
loss more so than on gain.9 Despite the decreases in gain goals and increases
in loss goals over time, by the time we get older, we are still focusing on gain-​
oriented goals at least as much as on loss-​oriented goals—​and in one study,
two times as many gain as loss goals, even in old age.10 Figure 13.1 portrays a
summary of these findings.
What may lead to the misinterpretation of these data is the fact that we
start out in youth with so many more gain goals than loss goals. Emerging
and young adults hardly focus on loss at all when making their plans, on av-
erage. But when we get older, even as we start to plan more for loss, we still
tend to focus on circumstances that we want as much as or even more than
on circumstances that we want to avoid.11
Keep in mind that we are now looking at the research on goals—​on older
adults’ plans for their future, which is objectively a shorter term prospect than
for youth. In addition, this research on goals focuses on gain, not eudaimonic
384  The Development of the Transformative Self

Number of Goals Gain Goals

Loss Goals

Younger Middle Older

Adulthood Adulthood Adulthood
Figure 13.1  Growth—​or at least gain—​is not just for the young. Note that
this figure approximates the findings across several studies. Over the course of
adulthood, gain orientation decreases and loss orientation increases, but gain
continues to be an important concern in older adulthood—​at least as much of
a concern as loss (depicted in the dotted oval). In some studies, older adults
emphasize significantly more gain goals than loss goals, whereas in other studies
older adults report gain and loss goals equally. Thus, older adults are at least as
concerned with making gains as with preventing losses.
Modified from Bauer, J. J., & Park, S. W. (2010). Growth isn’t just for the young: Growth narratives,
eudaimonic resilience, and the aging self. In P. S. Frye & C. L. M. Keyes (Eds.), Frontiers of Resilient
Aging (pp. 60–​89). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

growth. When it comes to eudaimonic growth goals, older adults have been
found to focus even more on eudaimonic growth than younger adults do
when planning their lives.12
Similarly, socioemotional selectivity theory claims that older adults are
more prone than younger adults toward identifying with personally mean-
ingful goals with emotional and social implications.13 Perhaps it is the case
that younger adults have more hoops through which to jump to break into
society. Perhaps younger adults are simply more attracted to the appearances
and conventions of social status. In any case, older adults are less so.14 When
it comes to planning their future, older adults are relatively more likely to
focus on eudaimonic, humanistic concerns of personally meaningful activi-
ties and relationships—​that is, growth-​oriented concerns—​than are younger
adults.15 Furthermore, older adults are especially adaptable when it comes to
 The Aging, Transformative Self  385

reframing their goals to meet undesirable realities, which yields a heightened

capacity to realize goals that are realistic.16 In other words, older adults may
well be more likely than younger adults to have a transformative self, even
when it comes to goals.

Growth Memories and the Aging Self

When looking at memories of the past (which are my favorite kind of memo-
ries), we again see a departure from the common view of aging. Personal and
autobiographical memories play an important role in the construction of a
transformative self in older adulthood—​particularly when considering the
personal, emotional aspect of autobiographical memories.17 Indeed, most of
the research on narrative meaning-​making in adulthood—​particularly older
adulthood, when life review is particularly common—​focuses not on goals
but on memories.18 What we find here is that older adults focus more on
eudaimonic, humanistic forms of growth than do emerging adults.19 Thus,
despite the onslaught of losses that come with aging, older adults tend to think
about their lives—​into the past and into the future—​in terms of eudaimonic
growth relatively more than younger adults do.
Older adults’ heightened capacity for reflective meaning-​making suggests
a heightened capacity for personality integration.20 In contrast, some re-
search shows that capacities for reflective meaning-​making are stable across
the course of adulthood and may decline across the period of older adult-
hood, particularly the capacity for psychosocial perspective-​taking.21 But to
curb this finding, research also suggests that declines in perspective-​taking
are nullified when taking into consideration the closeness of the relation-
ship in which the perspective-​taking takes place.22 In other words, it might
be that the vast amount of research on perspective-​taking in the laboratory
underestimates older adults’ capacities for perspective-​taking in the social
situations that actually matter to them in real life.
In any case, even if older adults do represent their thoughts less complexly
in older old age, I wish to consider the possibility that older adults may be
better at stating their highly integrated meanings in life more simply.23 In
other words, older adults’ life stories (including goals) reflect a heightened
capacity for personality integration, at least for those who have higher levels
of well-​being.24 It could well be that measures of complexity do not capture
the differentiation that at one time in life was more conscious and articulated
386  The Development of the Transformative Self

but with age and experience became more automatic. In other words, perhaps
older adults simply do not mention the details of the complexity of thinking
through which they arrived at their simpler, more integrated, and more el-
egant understanding of their lives. The writer Tor Norrtranders describes
an elegant concept that is especially apt for this scenario: exformation.25
Exformation is the information behind the information—​information that
is not presently articulated but that was processed previously in arriving at a
more elegant and integrative meaning structure. Perhaps the lower scores on
measures of complexity that research finds for older adults are a byproduct
of those older adults’ heightened capacity, gained over years of experience, to
integrate the subtler complexities of life and to distill a more parsimonious
understanding that only appears simple. Perhaps the psychosocial thinking
of older adults is simple in the sense of being conceptually elegant rather than
simplistic. This is to my mind an empirical question, one that has not been
examined in scientific research. Attainment aside, when it comes to subjec-
tive concerns for growth, older adults are more likely to value—​subjectively,
thematically—​the idea of eudaimonic growth compared to younger and
emerging adults.
So growth is not just for the young. In fact, eudaimonic growth is more
accurately said to be a feature of the aging self than of the youthful self—​
at least when considering how young and old interpret and plan their lives.
(These interpretations and plans are, after all, what a self is.) Of course, the
life stories of both young and old include elements of both growth and safety.
However, the life story in youth focuses relatively more on gaining social
status, others’ approval, and various forms of hedonic improvement (see
Chapter 5). In contrast, the life stories of older adults focus relatively more on
personally meaningful activities and relationships—​the kinds of things that
foster eudaimonic growth in the self and others (see Chapter 6). As a result,
I have come to the following conclusion: It is not that we stop thinking in sup-
posedly youthful ways when we get older. It’s that we stop thinking in exclusively
youthful ways.

Growth Is Not a Pollyanna Concept

I do not in any way mean to suggest that life in old age is all roses—​for those
individuals who have a transformative self or otherwise. Growth itself is
far from all roses. The findings of diminished cognitive complexity in later
 The Aging, Transformative Self  387

old age could very well reflect not only more simplistic expressions of self
but also a diminished capacity to think complexly about the self and others
(which is how the findings are typically interpreted). In addition, growth it-
self involves not merely positive affectivity. Indeed, as described in previous
chapters, growth is initiated to no small degree by a sense of disequilibration,
a matter of having to adjust to undesirable realities. It just so happens that
older adults are relatively good at doing this.26
The presence of growth in a life story does not dispel or nullify the losses,
conflicts, and pain that emerge in any person’s life story. Instead, the pres-
ence of growth themes—​in addition to that pain—​is part of what makes the
difference in whether a person adjusts well to life’s difficulties or not. Growth
is no Pollyanna construct. Instead, the valuing of eudaimonic, humanistic,
and organismic growth helps the individual to deal with problems head-​on,
with fewer defenses, and to adapt. Despite the fact that older adults iden-
tify with eudaimonic growth, and despite the fact that this identification
correlates with heightened levels of well-​being, we also have the finding that
adults’ appraisals of their own well-​being with regard to personal growth seem
to diminish in old age, on average.27 (In other words, older adults are less
satisfied with their own personal growth than are younger adults.) But based
on past research, I predict that growth themes in older adults’ narratives (ei-
ther memories or goals) moderate—​that is, interact with—​the inverse rela-
tion between age and personal growth-​related well-​being, such that growth
themes in people’s personal narratives would buffer the ill effects of age. We
have already seen that growth themes fully mediate—​that is, statistically
explain—​the positive relation between age and global well-​being.
But again, a transformative self does not gloss over the pain in one’s life.
The person with a transformative self confronts that pain, but with a con-
structive twist. In contrast, a feel-​good self leads a person to gloss over pain
(see Figure 4.3). An overly strong motive for self-​enhancement28 is prob-
lematic in part because it leads a person to ignore one’s own anxieties, one’s
own sadness, the pain of others, and the injustices that one might inflict on
others. Such experiences are all integral parts of life. The person with a trans-
formative self is attuned to human experiences, both as an experience of
life as it is (as explained in Chapter 3 on euvitalic personhood) and with a
mindset of compassion (as explained in Chapter 9 on the quiet ego). Indeed,
people with a high degree of growth motivation are more likely to acknowl-
edge the negatives in their lives than are people with low growth motivation
are. 29 However, some degree of self-​enhancement and repressive coping
388  The Development of the Transformative Self

during a painful series of events—​as a meso-​level form of self-​regulation

(see Chapter 9)—​can facilitate emotional adjustment, with no long-​term
repercussions.30 Yet at the macro level of self-​regulation, people—​perhaps
especially older adults—​who have a transformative self are more likely in
general to deal directly with life’s difficulties by addressing them within the
prospects of a longer term, big picture of meaning, notably in the various
forms of eudaimonic growth.31

Young Growth, Mature Growth

Both younger and older adults may narrate their life story as a transformative
self, even if older adults are more prone to do so. What does growth sound
like for young and old? In this section, we consider how, when younger and
older adults narrate growth, they do so differently. Themes of growth sound
different at different periods in the life course, from youth to maturity.
I like to use trees as a metaphor here, contrasting young growth and ma-
ture growth. According to the U.S. Forest Service, trees have five stages of
life,32 starting with seedlings (0–​10 years old) and then becoming poles and
saplings (10–​40 years old). Next, we see young growth (e.g., pines aged 40–​-​
80 years and hardwoods aged 40–​60 years; see Figure 13.2), which is com-
parable to the period in the human life span of young adulthood. After that
we see mature growth (e.g., pines aged 80–​140 years and hardwoods aged
60–​140 years; see Figure 13.3). This is comparable to older adulthood in the
human life course. Finally, we see that some trees live much longer, such as
the California redwoods, called “old mature,” from 500 to 1,000 years. Let’s
focus on young growth and mature growth.
Forests of young growth have a canopy that is filled or mostly filled.
Despite this, notably, young-​growth trees are still growing in height and den-
sity. Forests of mature growth are denser. I like to think of them as having
more substance, much as older adults’ life stories have more emotional and
meaningful content than younger adults’ stories do.33 Also like the aging self,
trees of mature growth are still growing, but at a slower rate than forests of
young growth. Let’s compare the qualities of growth narratives in the narra-
tive selves of younger versus older adults.
What does young growth sound like, and what does mature growth
sound like? One relatively easy and well-​established answer comes from the
theory of and subsequent research on Erik Erikson’s model of psychosocial
Figure 13.2  Young growth.
Source: From http://​www.treehotel.se/​en/​rooms.

Figure 13.3  Mature growth.

Source: From http://​edbookphoto.photoshelter.com/​image/​I0000ojG69O5Ggpc.
390  The Development of the Transformative Self

development. Clues to the sound of young growth, particularly in the human

life period of emerging adulthood, can be found in Erikson’s stage of identity
versus role confusion. At this point in development, we can expect growth
narratives to focus on the development of oneself as a person. Life stories
of adolescents and emerging adults may very well include concerns for
other people, but the overarching emphasis and center of gravity of the life
story—​particularly where growth is concerned—​will focus on one’s devel-
oping understanding of oneself, of figuring out which paths in life to pursue,
of figuring out where one stands in a world of ideals, beliefs, and social roles.
However, rather than focusing on the broader processes of identity develop-
ment in this section, we are focusing on what the idea of growth in particular
sounds like or looks like in people’s life stories as they age through adulthood.

Growth Themes of Identity, Intimacy, and Generativity

To do that, we compare what growth sounds like at different stages of

Erikson’s theory, particularly the last four stages: identity versus role con-
fusion (in adolescence and emerging adulthood), intimacy versus isolation
(young adulthood), generativity versus stagnation (in midlife), and ego in-
tegrity versus despair (older adulthood). Each stage centers on a psychosocial
crisis, task, or concern, which is to say, a preoccupying concern about oneself
in relation to others. Society (or specifically, modern, industrialized societies
at this point in history) challenges or otherwise pressures the individual to
have these concerns at particular times in life. These concerns include the
establishing of a sense of identity in youth, intimacy in young adulthood, and
generativity in midlife. These are what Erikson describes as the “healthy”
concerns for each stage, but any one individual may end up not having a
sense of those healthy concerns in one’s life, yielding a sense of role confusion
in youth, isolation in young adulthood, and stagnation in midlife.
I emphasize that each of these “healthy” concerns is a value orientation
for eudaimonic growth that manifests in the life story as a narrative theme.
The healthy concerns of each stage involve a focus on personally meaningful
activities, relationships, and ways of helping others (see Chapter 6). The “un-
healthy” counterparts involve the lack of such growth themes. People con-
ceptualize growth differently as the stages progress, which is in part how we
get the different stages and in part how we get differences between young
growth and mature growth. The primary difference is that young growth
 The Aging, Transformative Self  391

sounds more idealistic, less contextualized, and less emotionally complex than
does mature growth. A brief overview of these three stages might help give a
sense of the process.
By identity, Erikson means an understanding of who one is, particularly
in terms of values, where that understanding is a product of both the explo-
ration of alternative values and the commitment to a set of values of one’s
own. To have a self-​identity in this sense, one must know where one stands
in society, relative to others; one must not only know the social roles that one
plays in life but also have a relatively solid sense of the underlying values of
those roles in one’s culture. Lacking such an understanding of self, Erikson
says, is to be confused with regard to one’s place in society. Erikson slots the
period of adolescence—​and now, based on research, we include the period
of emerging adulthood34—​as the time in which individuals in industrialized
societies become focused on the psychosocial task of establishing a sense of
identity. But identity formation is a lifelong process. As for what growth looks
or sounds like, I briefly note now that youth identifies more with the devel-
opment of individualistically focused concerns, whereas maturity identifies
more with the development of a wider scope of people in psychosocial space.
Intimacy for Erikson refers to a mature, reciprocal relationship with an-
other person. Isolation is the lack of such a connection. The psychosocial
concern of intimacy versus isolation has always been the most difficult stage
to establish. Why not intimacy in adolescence? Certainly teenagers have ro-
mantic relationships, and these relationships have an influence on the person
and their development. (For that matter, why not intimacy in middle age?)
On this point, it is important to consider that, from Erikson’s point of view,
intimacy was not merely about “having” a relationship but rather about the
development of a mutual, reciprocal relationship—​the kind that depends
on one’s having established a relatively sound understanding of oneself (i.e.,
identity achievement, through the process of exploration and commitment,
as described in Chapter 12). Such a sense of identity hedges against the pos-
sibility that individuals in a relationship either use the relationship for the
primary purpose of consolidating one’s own sense of identity or get used by
the relationship in capitulating to the other person’s set of values and beliefs
in lieu of having formed a set of one’s own. Healthy intimacy for Erikson
involves the mutual coming together of two individuals who have already
achieved a sense of identity for themselves. But this does not mean that iden-
tity formation is an individualistic endeavor. As noted previously, identity is
formed dialogically and dynamically within a developing social ecology. But
392  The Development of the Transformative Self

this co-​construction of identity ensues whether one’s relationships are con-

strued and enacted in mutual or lopsided ways.
Generativity is a concern (i.e., a value orientation) for and a commitment
to fostering the welfare of future generations of society—​and even of the spe-
cies. Having such concerns and acting on them, Erikson says, is an integral
part of psychological health and well-​being for adults in midlife. Not to have
such concerns or not to act on them leads the person toward a sense of stag-
nation, a sense of not contributing to something larger than oneself. (Note
the implicit ideal of progress—​or a lack thereof—​in the term stagnation.)
Like identity and intimacy, generativity is both a concern and an act35—​a
value orientation and a value actualization. Generative concerns and gener-
ative acts come in many forms, including the more obvious instances such
as parenting, teaching, coaching, and mentoring. However, importantly,
generative concerns are subjectively interpreted: Any one action may be
interpreted as generative or not, depending on the person or the situation.
What matters is one’s intentions or motives—​the reasons one has—​for doing
a particular action. If a person is acting for the purpose of fostering the wel-
fare and growth of future generations of society (or even “society” or the
species in the more abstract sense), then the act may be generative. For in-
stance, most people do not consider investment banking to be a generative
act. But consider the narrative of a generative investment banker (i.e., psy-
chosocially generative, if not also financially generative): “I’m trying to do
my best to help [my clients] invest their money [so they can] improve their
lives and their children’s lives [. . .] to give them opportunities [like] an edu-
cation.” As explained in Chapters 4–​7, actions and events themselves only
become meaningful upon interpretation, and the value-​laden themes that
are associated with those events are what give those events their particular
meanings. In this case, at least part of the meaning of investing money lies in
furthering the welfare of future generations—​a generative concern. In con-
trast, the seemingly generative act of teaching can be cast with nongenerative
motives, as in this excerpt from a narrative of a major life decision: “I decided
on a teaching career because [. . .] I like to hear myself talk [and] I wanted the
summers off.” As this narrative unfolds further, it does not describe the many
generative concerns that are common in teaching narratives, such as facil-
itating students’ learning, wanting them to develop as individuals or whole
persons, or loving to see that “spark” when a student suddenly grasps a con-
cept. Now, this is not to say that the person who told this narrative does not
in fact have generative reasons for teaching; only that these reasons do not
 The Aging, Transformative Self  393

surface in this narrative (still, the narratives do predict well-​being and other
qualities of life). The broader point here is that any one act can be interpreted
as generative or not, even if some acts are more likely to elicit generative
concerns than others.
Generativity is interpreted differently not only by individuals but also by
different cultures. Ed de St. Aubin and colleagues have found that although
generativity is a universal ideal across cultures, cultures vary in their expres-
sion of generativity, a point that Erikson made and that research is bearing
out.36 For instance, generativity in measures in the United States focuses
on the individual, whereas generativity in Japanese measures focuses on
collective, society-​wide notions of generativity that change across the gen-
erations. The very notion of generative action can be seen as more com-
munally enacted (in Japan) or individually executed (in the United States).
Furthermore, the American approach to generativity starts not only with
the individual rather than the culture but also from the older generation to
the younger generation. However, a temporally reversed order of genera-
tivity is also present, as de St. Aubin and colleagues have found in a Mexican
American sample: Generativity also includes caring for the older generation.
In this culture as well as others studied, such as in Italy, the locus of genera-
tivity is not the individual (who is generative toward other individuals) but
rather the multigenerational family unit itself.37

Stages Are Age Appropriate, But Identity

Develops Throughout

The person who has a transformative self is concerned with the kind of iden-
tity development that Erikson has in mind. Creating an identity of one’s own
may be the central concern of adolescence and emerging adulthood, but
people continue to develop their self-​identity throughout the adult years. As
identity develops from adolescence through midlife, at least in the Eriksonian
ideal, the self expands in psychosocial space to include an increasingly wider
range of others with whom one identifies as integral to oneself. If all goes ac-
cording to the cultural ideal, then one’s self-​identity as an individual remains
but with an additional focus on mutual relationships in young adulthood and
yet another focus on generativity in midlife—​all the while maintaining the
full integrity of each of these aspects of identity, even as identity expands to
incorporate them.
394  The Development of the Transformative Self

One problem with Erikson’s stages is that they too easily lead to oversim-
plification. As Erikson insisted, concerns for identity (like the other seven
concerns) are found from childhood through adulthood. The same goes for
the psychosocial concerns of every stage—​anyone might have the concerns
of any of Erikson’s stages at just about any point in their development.
However, certain psychosocial tasks are of heightened concern at particular
age periods in (at least) modern, industrialized societies. Let’s consider iden-
tity development specifically. Although young children have a sense of iden-
tity, it is not until adolescence that identity becomes a preoccupying concern
for the individual. After this period, a concern for identity remains, but other
concerns take center stage, although in an expanded sense.38
In older adulthood, Erikson says we take this expansion a step further, not
so much outward in space but as more inclusive of that space. The psycho-
social task of ego integrity (versus despair) is a matter of coming to accept
and to integrate all those various people and events and forces that contrib-
uted to the formation of who one is as a whole person. The ability to do so,
it is worth noting, takes several decades of life experience—​and identity
development—​to emerge. Certainly we learn to accept and to integrate the
good and the bad within us in bits and pieces here and there throughout the
life course, but it takes many decades before we become proficient enough
at it—​again, if all goes according to the cultural ideal. Concepts of growth in
older adulthood come to involve a sense of acceptance and integration of the
various forces—​good and bad—​that constitute “one’s own and only life.”39
This understanding of one’s life, including the rosy parts and the thorny
parts, then serves as the basis for launching further explorations into height-
ened understandings and deepened experiences.
Although adults continue to work on constructing and reconstructing
their identity throughout life, the project of identity reconstruction ceases
to be adults’ primary psychosocial concern—​if all goes well. Society requires
that we individuals not only figure out what commitments to make but also
act on them. Erikson’s theory focuses on two ways that adults do this, if all
goes well: in intimate relationships (intimacy) and in contributing to the wel-
fare of future generations of society (generativity). When I say “if all goes
well” in this context, I mean that Erikson means that psychologically healthy
development involves age-​appropriate concerns for identity, intimacy, and
generativity. As it turns out, empirical research supports this claim, finding
that an age-​appropriate concern for identity, intimacy, and generativity
correlates with psychological well-​being.
 The Aging, Transformative Self  395

First comes the question of whether people at particular age periods

(namely, youth, young adulthood, and midlife) are in fact more likely than
at other age periods to express concerns for working toward identity, inti-
macy, and generativity (respectively). Research has supported this sce-
nario: Emerging adults are much more likely to focus on identity-​related
concerns than generativity-​related concerns, whereas midlife and older
adults are much more likely to have a higher proportion of their psycho-
social concerns focused on generativity than are emerging and younger
adults.40 Figure 13.4 illustrates such findings.41 In this figure, we see that
emerging adults are especially concerned with the growth of themselves
as individuals—​with their own identity development. In contrast, midlife
adults—​while equally concerned with identity, intimacy, and generativity—​
are proportionally more concerned with generativity in midlife than at other
periods in their life (notably here, than in emerging adulthood).
Turning to the question of psychological well-​being, research has dem-
onstrated that Eriksonian identity achievement in adolescence and emer-
ging adulthood corresponds to psychological well-​being, particularly in the
broad sense of happiness, love, wisdom, and growth. Plenty of research has
also demonstrated that generative concerns in midlife correspond to well-​
being in the broad sense—​not only hedonic happiness but also community

0.7

0.6
Proportion of Growth Strivings

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Emerging Adults Mid-Life Adults

Identity Intimacy Generativity

Figure 13.4  Emerging and midlife adults have different proportions of

psychosocial concerns.
Source: From Bauer, Graham, & McAdams (2019).
396  The Development of the Transformative Self

involvement, societal engagement, the cultivation of prosocial values in chil-

dren, wisdom (as ego development or value perspectivity), and good-​life
stories.42
My colleagues, students, and I have recently found precisely what Erikson
hypothesized about youth and midlife: Emerging adults whose personal
memories focused on identity development had higher levels of well-​being,
but midlife adults who focused on identity did not (see Figure 13.5a; the
downward slope for the solid line was statistically insignificant, so mid-
life adults who focused on identity were no happier or less happy than
those who did not). In Figure 13.5b, we see the reverse pattern for genera-
tive concerns: Midlife adults whose memories focused on generativity had
higher levels of well-​being, whereas emerging adults’ well-​being had nothing
to do with whether their memories focused on generativity or not (here the
dotted line does not represent a statistically significant difference between
end points).
Whether focusing on identity development or generativity, as we meas-
ured it, either focus is one of eudaimonic growth. The difference is whether
the growth in question deals with the development of oneself as an individual
or with the development of others. Thus, one answer to the question, “What
does young growth and mature growth sound like?” is this: Young growth is
more concerned with oneself, whereas mature growth is concerned with others
as well.
To give a sense of a growth narrative about identity development, here is
an excerpt from a personal story by a 20-​year-​old about a high point in life:

[W]hen the band I played in for many years performed at the [stadium]. To
be performing . . . my own compositions for an enthusiastic young audience
was incredible . . . I was thinking and feeling that my musical endeavors
were finally amounting to something and this was just the start of a great
journey.

The emphasis in this narrative is on “amounting to something” and one’s own

path of becoming. To give a sense of a growth narrative about generativity,
here is an excerpt from a personal story by an 81-​year-​old about a high point
in life:

[Years ago] I went to Germany as a trainee in a chemical factory [and]

met a friend [who] taught me [that] “friendship” has nothing to do with
 (a)
4.9

4.7

4.5
Psychological Well-Being

4.3

4.1

3.9

3.7

3.5
Non-Identity Identity Growth
Growth Memories Memories
Emerging Adults Mid-Life Adults

(b)
5.3

5.1

4.9
Psychological Well-Being

4.7

4.5

4.3

4.1

3.9

3.7

3.5
Non-Generativity Generativity
Growth Memories Growth Memories
Emerging Adults Mid-Life Adults

Figure 13.5  Focusing on identity development relates to well-​being for

emerging adults but not midlife adults (a), whereas focusing on generativity
relates to well-​being for midlife adults but not emerging adults (b).
Source: From Bauer, Graham, & McAdams (2019).
398  The Development of the Transformative Self

race, religion or nationality. This incident has made me look at others with
an open mind and try to help others when in need. As a result I mentor
[people] at our church.

The emphasis in this narrative is on both identifying with others who are not
just in one’s own group and giving back to society. Again, I do not wish to
give the impression that growth narratives about identity or generativity are
only told by younger or older adults. Indeed, older adults are likely to focus
on generative concerns, which may well lay a foundation for the develop-
ment of ego integrity.43

Mature Growth as Narrative Depth

Age-​related psychosocial concerns are not the only way to differentiate young
growth from mature growth. Maturity is also about how deeply one interprets
those experiences. “Deep” is vague, I admit. I have been searching for a better
word for years. “Complex” is apt, but that deals with value perspectivity and
a structural–​developmental approach to narrative self-​interpretation, which
we cover in the next chapter. “Deep” works because it deals with the com-
bination of what Laura Carstensen calls an emotion focus, what Tillman
Habermas and Susan Bluck call autobiographical reasoning, what Monisha
Pasupathi and Kate McLean call autobiographical meaning-​making, and what
Gisela Labouvie-​Vief calls affective complexity and optimization. “Deep”
also refers to, in largely non-​narrative research, what Ken Sheldon calls self-​
concordance—​doing activities that resonate with deeply held values. All these
terms converge on the idea that maturity in people’s thinking about their
lives involves a heightened capacity to consider the underlying emotions and
affect-​laden values of the self. These terms converge on the depth of person-
ally meaningful experience—​and on experiential growth (see Chapters 6 and
8). These researchers (and others, including myself) have found that midlife
and older adults are, on average, better at constructing value-​laden, emotion-​
based meanings in life—​which are, by just about any account, what we mean
when we say “meaning” in life.
One characteristic of a mature growth narrative is that it deals more with
the depth and complexities of actual, lived experiences than with the abstract
ideals of the way life should be. We see a similar difference between Labouvie-​
Vief ’s idealistic thinking in youth and pragmatic thinking in adulthood.44
 The Aging, Transformative Self  399

Pragmatic understanding in a personal narrative conveys actual experience

in lived context, where ideals tend to play out in real life not quite as one
might have expected but rather in the context of other people’s intentions
and desires and in the context of various, unforeseen contingencies along the
path of taking action.
I remember being a sophomore in college in Psych 101, hearing for the
first time about Labouvie-​Vief ’s distinction between idealistic and pragmatic
thinking. I distinctly remember sitting in class, wearing my high school base-
ball cap (backwards, as always then), thinking how awful her notion of prag-
matic thinking sounded: Essentially, I thought, the pragmatic thinking of
adults was simply a matter of selling out—​of not following through on one’s
ideals. But some years later, I started to realize what she meant. It is not that
ideals are simply cashed in for materialistic, self-​serving opportunism. It is
that ideals are just that—​ideals for what life could be if, well, actual life would
not get in the way. I eventually realized that ideals can serve as guides, like a
map, but that ideals are certainly not the actual territory in which we actually
live. The territory of life is more nuanced, with detours and potholes to boot.
The trick is to understand one’s life in terms of the values and ideals that one
uses to guide oneself, while situating those ideals within the broader context
of the lived territory and contexts of actual life. That’s where idealistic stories
(dreams, really) become lived stories, the meaningful stories of a relatively
mature self-​identity, born of multiple experiences—​notably enacted and
talked about with other people—​that yield an array of perspectives on life.
In older adulthood, the concept of growth may well involve concerns for
loss, but the thrust of the narrative is about growth, particularly growth in
one’s understanding of underlying motivations and emotions. Consider this
excerpt from the story of a high point in life by a woman aged 65 years:

I suddenly felt this incredible love for [my granddaughter] and almost si-
multaneously I felt a surge of deep pain and sadness and I became con-
scious, I feel, for the first time, that the price of loving so completely, so
unconditionally is that the other side [. . .] of connection is loss [. . .] and
knowing [this] has greatly enhanced my life.

This narrative shows not only affective complexity but also an acceptance and
integration of life’s difficulties into one’s identity and meanings in life—​and
acceptance and integration that is the ideal for Erikson’s stage of ego integrity.
Furthermore, this kind of emotional awareness illustrates the principle of
400  The Development of the Transformative Self

identity balance in Susan Krauss Whitbourne’s identity process theory, which

facilitates psychosocial (or eudaimonic) growth.45
By viewing maturity as a matter of a life story’s incorporating greater depth
of experience, just as by viewing maturity as a matter of age-​related psycho-
social concerns, we are taking the perspective that maturity and development
are matters of narrative content (provided we are studying narrative self-​
identity at all). In the next chapter, we view maturity as increasing degrees
of the value perspectivity by which we think about the self and others. In
other words, we take the perspective that maturity is a matter of developing
narrative structure. But in both cases we see features of how a transformative
self—​and the person who has one—​develops.